Pakistan
The
2013 election was of particular note for women as Pakistan ratified the ICCPR
in 2010, so this was the first election in which it was subject to its
obligations. Pakistan ratified CEDAW in
1996. The Pakistani constitution also prohibits
gender discrimination and places an affirmative obligation on the state to
ensure full participation of women in all spheres of national life (article
34). Therefore, there was no question of Pakistan’s legal commitments in this
area.
While Pakistan saw improvement in 2013 as
compared to the 2009 election, there was still an enormous gap between the
number of men and women registered to vote, and relatively low registration
rates generally. The UN estimates Pakistan’s population to comprise 88.5
million women and 91.4 million men (179.9 million in total).[1]
Numerous studies, including by Gender Concerns International, found that
…women represented 43.6% of registered voters for
the 2013 General Elections: 37.6 million women were registered to vote
nationwide, compared to 48.6 million men. The percentage of women voters was
lowest in FATA, with 34.4% female registration (0.59 million women), compared
to 1.1 million men. The highest was in Islamabad, with 46% female registration.
The percentage of women registered as voters in each province was 42.6% in
Balochistan, 42.9% in KP, 43.8% in Punjab and 44.7% in Sindh15.[2]
|
Voter Registration
by Province and Gender[3]
|
|
Province/Area
|
Men Voters
|
Women Voters
|
Total Voters
|
|
Balochistan
|
1,915,388
|
1,421,271
|
3,336,659
|
|
FATA
|
1,142,234
|
596,079
|
1,738,313
|
|
Federal Area
|
337,900
|
288,064
|
625,964
|
|
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
|
7,008,533
|
5,257,624
|
12,266,157
|
|
Punjab
|
27,697,701
|
21,561,633
|
49,259,334
|
|
Sindh
|
10,490,631
|
8,472,744
|
18,963,375
|
|
Total
|
48,592,387
|
37,597,415
|
86,189,802
|
Women
not having the requisite identification card--a major issue identified as a
frequent obstacle in this report--is the most significant reason for the
disparity. In order to cast a vote, Pakistanis
must first register with the National Database and Registration Authority and
obtain a computerized national identity card (“CNIC”). A report from
IFES states that although major efforts were undertaken by the election commission
and civil society to register women to vote, because
the voter registration list was compiled using computerized national identity
card (CNIC) information, it left out approximately 20 percent of eligible
Pakistani women.[4]
Nationally, 90%
of men say that they have a CNIC compared to 79% of women. The differential
between men and women on CNIC is highest in KPK where nearly all men (97%) say
they have a CNIC but only 81% of women say the same. In Punjab 91% of men say
they have a CNIC compared to 76% of women.[5] NADRA,
the agency responsible for the distribution of the CNIC reported that 92
million CNICs were issued in advance of the election, but only 40 million to
women.[6]
According to
IFES, in Pakistan there was a lack of awareness amongst women regarding the
election processes including how to register. Illiteracy, discussed at length
in this report, has also been identified as a major challenge in women’s
ability to register to vote in Pakistan, especially rural women. These women are simply, in some cases, unable
to fill out the forms.[7] Two-thirds
of the country’s working age women are reportedly illiterate.[8]
Many other themes identified above are reflected in the experience
of Pakistan. In rural areas of Pakistan,
many women do not get their CNICs because they are unable to leave their house
without a male. Their movements outside
the house are restricted. In another
example, “registrars say male household heads answering the door to the
registrar may have either not reported the existence of their wives, daughters,
or sisters, or flatly refused to have the female members of their household
registered. The reasons for this vary, and range from the conviction that women
should not be involved in politics to the desire to keep the women in their
family off government records and sheltered from government interference.” Moreover, “ the practice of employing only male
registrars for house calls also likely contributed to low female registration
as in many areas women at home without their male relatives were unlikely to
even open the door to an unfamiliar male visitor.”[9] Cultural norms and belief systems hindered
women’s ability to register to vote.
The problem of persistent gendered role
definitions also occurs in Pakistan. The
notion
of “private woman and public man” is still strong, especially in certain
regions. This can be especially true in tribal areas where the gender gap is
even more marked. Women are generally left out of public life in
places like Fata by their high level of illiteracy, having all of the family
responsibilities, cultural barriers and a perception that politics is only a
man’s concern. In Fata women’s mobility is strictly controlled.[10]
In
another echo of the themes above, it is believed that a
significant number of internally displaced people may also have been
inadvertently excluded from the electoral roll and as we have seen, women tend
to be over-represented in IDP populations.
To
its credit, the government did make significant efforts
to ensure that as many eligible
Pakistanis as possible could obtain IDs and register in 2013, and
tried to facilitate female registration especially – for example, on Fridays 11
centers run by the national registration authority were staffed exclusively by
women. At the same time, no “women serve on the Election Commission,
and the officers of the ECP, including its directors and provincial commissioners,
are all men. The ECP further reported that less than 2 percent of its staff
members and less than 2 percent of DROs, ROs, and Assistant Returning Officers
(AROs) are women.[11]
Cameroon
Cameroon provides a useful example of the problems women have in
some parts of the world because of religious strictures that prevent their
pictures from being taken.
Cameroon, like many countries in Africa and elsewhere is currently
instituting a biometric registration system.
There is concern that this may end up disenfranchising women especially
“in the country's predominantly Muslim north where cultural practices,
including the wearing of a veil, may prevent them from having their photos
taken.”[12]
According to press reports, “In order to register to vote in the February
2013 parliamentary and local council elections, citizens were required to have
a national identity card, with a photograph. In addition, photographs had to be
taken of people registering to vote and people were not allowed to wear caps,
lenses, veils or anything that could distort their facial identity. In some
parts of the country, women are not allowed to take off their veils in public.”[13] There is also the problem, as in other
places, of the strict control of women’s movements outside the home by men.[14]
The election
commission tried to address the problem by going to the homes of the women so
that their pictures could be taken without the veil outside the presence of men,
but this did not solve the problem of women not having the national identity
card which required a photograph as well.
The commission planned an education campaign to sensitize husbands on
the need to allow their wives to have a national identity card.[15]
Nepal
Nepal is another
country where the problem of women not having the requisite documentation – and
being discriminated against quite blatantly in the process for getting such
documentation – is at the forefront of the problems.
The Carter
Center has done extensive study of Nepal’s voter registration procedures over
the last year, including issues related to women. In February of 2013[16]
TCC reported that in Nepal women have distinctly lower rates of registration
than men.
The main problem
is quite clear: the Ministry of Home Affairs guidelines require a married woman
to have her husband or father in law support the application for the
citizenship certificate. “This can be difficult to obtain in some cases – for
example, in cases of divorce, separation, or becoming a widow – or sometimes
for cultural reasons. In effect, the guidelines place married women in an
unequal position, as married men are permitted to obtain citizenship
certificates with the support of their own parents.”[17]
Citizenship certificates are required to register to vote.
Another
obstacle is one described at length above: the distance to registration centers
and the time and resources this requires.
The
Carter Center issued follow up reports on these issues in October of 2013.[18]
TCC found that the Ministry of Home Affairs had pursued one of the
recommendations TCC had made in earlier reports to ensure more people,
especially women, had the requisite citizenship certificates to register to
vote. First was
the deployment of 364 mobile teams that, among other government services, provided
for citizenship certificate distribution, and deployed them to remote areas
(often with voter registration staff). Also the Ministry and the election commission
jointly deployed 472 mobile teams in all 75 districts of Nepal to register
voters.[19]
“The
MoHA informed The Carter Center that in total, 603,094 citizenship certificates
were issued during the two phases, with women being the primary beneficiaries (365,410
women and 237,684 men).” TCC did critique the program noting that some people
had to travel far distances even to get to the mobile centers, and as we have
seen this presents an even greater challenge for women. “For example, in Gorkha
(Simjung VDC), Carter Center observers noted that some citizens had travelled
four hours to reach the registration site.”[20]
The Carter
Center revisited the issue of women being required to have her husband or
father support their applications for the citizenship certificate. “Although
these guidelines are still in force, the MoHA informed the Center that it had
issued an instruction to district administration offices in January 2013
allowing married women to obtain a citizenship certificate using the father’s
citizenship certificate as supporting document.” This was hardly a complete solution. Among other problems this might continue to
cause, “women who choose to use their father’s citizenship certificate as
support could forfeit their right to inherit from their husbands (if they do
not have a marriage certificate) and that could create difficulties for their
children to obtain citizenship certificates. This often makes women reluctant
to use this possibility.”[21]
Nepal is also an example of where highly gendered roles continue
to discriminate against women which impacts their ability to register to vote.
According to Nepal’s submission to the CEDAW Committee, “Gender relations in
Nepal continue to be defined by a patriarchal value system, which perpetuates
women’s subordination. Many women do not question it and to a certain degree
believe that men have the right to control their lives and bodies.”[22]
Guatemala
There are a very
high number of undocumented women in Guatemala, especially among indigenous,
poor and rural women. This has been
demonstrated through surveys, including one by Gallup in Guatemala, but there
is not precise data.
A
big reason for this is that these women are very likely to be illiterate. 36%
of Guatemalans are illiterate, but 51% of indigenous women cannot read or write.
“Only 17 of every 100 girls complete primary school, and in rural areas 66 per
cent of them drop out of school before completing the third grade.”[23]
Moreover,
“Patriarchy and exclusion persist as the bases of societal arrangements, in
which values are gauged through macho and racist socio-cultural standards that
discriminate against women’s participation.” [24]
An NDI report on
barriers to participation in Guatemala revealed a number of the obstacles women
confront in that country particularly.[25]
First the study confirmed that there is a wide gap in participation between men
and women, among both the indigenous and the ladino populations,[26]
although it was even more extreme in indigenous communities.[27]
Not
surprisingly, the report found that lack of proper identification “is clearly
the most frequent reason for not voting amongst both ladino and indigenous
respondents alike.”[28] A
problem more particular to women is that they are not involved in civic life in
general, which has a clear correlation to their failure to be registered to
vote.[29]
Beyond
conducting a statistical survey, NDI also employed focus groups. These
workshops found the following:
Participation gap between men and women
Main problems detected:
- Difficulties to obtain identity card (cedula)
- Lack of money
- Cultural problems
- Discrimination
- Education
- Language
Main causes of problems:
- The cost of
getting an identity card is a barrier especially for women, as they are often
economically dependent on their male family members or husbands.
- Lack of
instruction and education is even more pressing amongst women.
- Lack of
documents among women for various institutional, idiomatic and cultural
reasons.
- Male chauvinism
is a cultural factor. Men don’t deem it necessary to register their daughters
in the Civil Registry when they are born, and in due time they are not allowed
to get their identity card nor to participate in civic or communal activities.
It is a patriarchal and racist system.
- Language
barriers are higher in indigenous women as many of them do not speak Spanish.
This was exemplified as follows: “Women only need to use their native language
because they’re always at home taking care of the children.”
- Participants
expressed that therefore indigenous women are not informed and are not aware of their rights and obligations.
- Scarce
institutional attention towards women. The government is the reflection of a
chauvinist society. Ongoing policies and approaches are insufficient.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has supported these findings. It found that, “while long-entrenched stereotypes and
discrimination have been obstacles for women’s
participation other more pragmatic barriers have also conspired to prevent
women from voting, such as the lack of official identification papers…Of the
registered voters, approximately 57% are men and 43% women. Reports indicate
that around 30% of the women who are eligible to vote are
not registered especially in indigenous and rural communities.” [30]
Bolivia
As in Guatemala,
there are a very high number of undocumented women in Bolivia, especially among
indigenous, poor and rural women. As the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has reported, there is a “kind of dual discrimination against indigenous and peasant
women who have been unable to obtain identity documents and have thereby been
prevented de facto from forming or joining political parties and participating
individually in elections.” The IAHCR further reports “that a high
number of women, in particular indigenous women in rural areas, older women,
and women with disabilities, do not have identity documents and cannot,
therefore, exercise their political rights.[31]
In addition, as
in so many other countries, the issues of illiteracy and lack of education come
into play. “In
Bolivia, the illiteracy rate for women is 19.35
per cent, while the rate for men is 6.94
per cent. In the rural area feminine illiteracy is 37.91
per cent, while the masculine rate is 14.42
per cent.”[32]
The typical cultural barriers also exist in Bolivia, where
despite progress an ethos of gender discrimination persists. According to
UNICEF, In
Bolivia, a traditional misogynist culture persists where women are
assigned a subordinate, traditional and dependent role, mainly the roles
of reproduction and care of the family.[33] This may be particularly so in
indigenous communities. One example is “Aymara democracy—the Aymara being one of the most
populous indigenous peoples in Bolivia—in which only males can participate in
public debate: the Communal Assembly—parlakipawi—as the highest
authority and centre of community life, bars female participation. Being
elected the main authority (jilakata or kuraka) is a privilege
that is enjoyed only by men who are married, own land, and are heads of family.”[34]
Afghanistan
[1] NDI, ANFREL, THE
2013 NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS IN PAKISTAN, Election
Observation Mission Final Report, 2013, p. 20.
[2] Gender Concerns International, GENDER ELECTION MONITORING MISSION PAKISTAN, General National Assembly Election, 11 May 2013, p.
21.
[3]NDI, ANFREL,
THE 2013 NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL
ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS IN PAKISTAN, Election Observation Mission Final
Report, 2013, p. 20.
[4] IFES, “Using a Gender Lens to Examine Pakistan’s Historic
Election,” June 20, 2013.
[5] IFES,
SURVEY ASSESSING BARRIERS TO WOMEN OBTAINING COMPUTERIZED NATIONAL
IDENTITY CARDS (CNICs), February 2013, p. 11.
[6] DRI, Women’s Participation in the Upcoming 2013 Election, Pakistan’s
International Law Commitments under CEDAW, March 2013, p. 6
[7] “Most Women in Rural Areas Still Without
CNICs,” Dawn.com, February 23, 2013.
[9] Asia Foundation, “Why are 10 Million Women Missing from Pakistan’s
Electoral Rolls?”, In Asia, April 4, 2012.
[10] Dr Syed Hussain Shaheed Soherwordi, “Females and FATA,” The Express Tribune with the International Herald Tribune, May 5, 2013.
[11] NDI, ANFREL, THE
2013 NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS IN PAKISTAN, Election
Observation Mission Final Report, 2013, p. 52.
[12] Ngala Killian Chimtom, “Cameroon:
Keeping the Veil On Women's Electoral Participation,” November 7, 2012 at
http://allafrica.com/stories/201211080409.html?viewall=1
[16] The Carter Center, Fifth Interim
Statement on the Election Commission of Nepal’s “Voter Register with
Photograph” Program, Feb. 28, 2013.
[17] The Carter Center, Fifth Interim Statement on the Election
Commission of Nepal’s “Voter Register with Photograph” Program, Feb. 28, 2013,p. 15.
[18] The Carter Center, Sixth
Interim Statement on the Election Commission of Nepal’s Voter Register with
Photograph Program,
October 1, 2013.
[19] The Carter Center,
Sixth Interim Statement on the Election Commission of Nepal’s Voter
Register with Photograph Program, October 1, 2013, p. 15.
[22] Nepal’s Implementation Status of the Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Independent
Report prepared by the National Women’s Commission
of Nepal to
supplement the Combined 4th and 5th Periodic Report Submitted to the CEDAW
Committee by the Government of Nepal,
June
26, 2011, p.3.
[23] International IDEA, 2002,
Women in Parliament, Stockholm (http://www.idea.int).
This is an English translation of Ninth Montenegro, “El desafío de la
participación política de la mujer en Guatemala,” in International IDEA Mujeres en el Parlamento. Más allá de los números,
Stockholm, Sweden, 2002, p. 1.
[25] NDI, Barriers
to Electoral Participation in Guatemala, 2007
[31] ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES IACHR OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc.
34, Access to Justice and Social Inclusion: The Road
Towards Strengthening Democracy in Bolivia, June 28, 2007.
[32] UNICEF, The Situation of Women in Bolivia at http://www.unicef.org/bolivia/children_1538.htm
[33] UNICEF, The Situation of Women in Bolivia at http://www.unicef.org/bolivia/children_1538.htm
[34] Jimena Costa Benavides, Women’s Political Participation in Bolivia: Progress and Obstacles, PAPER PRESENTED AT INTERNATIONAL IDEA WORKSHOP: The Implementation of Quotas: Latin American
Experiences, Lima, Peru, 23–24 February 2003, p. 9.
